David Feeney (Batman, Australian Labor Party, Shadow Minister for Justice) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Thank you very much, Mr Speaker. I join with others in congratulating you on your unanimous election as Speaker of this House.

I rise to speak on this bill, which contains a range of measures to improve the Commonwealth's criminal justice arrangements, including amendments to: improve the operation and effectiveness of the serious drug and precursor offences in part 9.1 of the Criminal Code Act 1995, the Criminal Code; to amend the Criminal Code to clarify the war crime offence of 'outrages upon personal dignity' in a non-international armed conflict; to expand the definition of 'forced marriage' in the Criminal Code to include circumstances in which a victim does not freely and fully consent because he or she is incapable of understanding the nature and effect of a marriage ceremony; to increase the penalties for the forced marriage offences in the Criminal Code to ensure they are commensurate with the most serious slavery-related facilitation offences; to rectify certain administrative inefficiencies, address certain legislative anomalies and clarify provisions in part 1B of the Crimes Act 1914 relating to federal offenders; to allow the interstate transfer of federal prisoners to occur at a location other than a prison; to facilitate information sharing about federal offenders between the Attorney-General's Department and relevant third-party agencies; to amend the Anti-Money Laundering and Counter-Terrorism Financing Act 2006 to clarify and address enforceability issues and operational constraints identified by the Australian Transaction Reports and Analysis Centre, AUSTRAC; to allow the Integrity Commissioner to perform his or her functions more efficiently and effectively, while improving the general operation of the Law Enforcement Integrity Commissioner Act 2006; to amend the Australian Crime Commission Act 2002 to improve the efficiency and effectiveness of the Australian Crime Commission's special operations and investigations; to amend the Proceeds of Crime Act 2002 to increase penalties for failing to comply with a production order or with a notice to a financial institution in proceeds-of-crime investigations; to further amend the Proceeds of Crime Act 2002 to address ambiguity in the provisions, streamline the appointment of proceeds-of-crime examiners and support the administration of confiscated assets by the official trustee; to give the Independent Commissioner Against Corruption in South Australia, whose office only became operational in September of 2013, the ability to access information from Commonwealth agencies, consistent with other anti-corruption bodies found in other states of our Commonwealth, defences for certain Commonwealth telecommunications offences and the ability to apply for certain types of search warrants; to update references to reflect the new name and titles associated with the Queensland Crime and Corruption Commission consequential to the Crime and Misconduct Commission Amendment Act 2014 in Queensland coming into force; to clarify when a variation to controlled operations would require deputy commissioner or commissioner approval, and clarify that an authority for a controlled operation must not be varied if it would alter the criminal offences to which the controlled operation relates; and, lastly, to amend two paragraphs in the Classification (Publications, Films and Computer Games) Act 1995 for consistency with current Commonwealth drafting practices, and to correct an amendment to the act made by the Classification (Publications, Films and Computer Games) Amendment (Classification Tools and Other Measures) Act 2014.

The bill also includes amendments to insert the concept of being 'knowingly concerned' in the commission of an offence as an additional form of secondary criminal liability in section 11.2 of the Criminal Code, and to introduce mandatory minimum sentences of five years imprisonment for firearm trafficking.

While Labor supports the great majority of measures found in this bill, which will improve Commonwealth criminal justice arrangements, we have serious concerns about some of the proposed amendments and do not support the bill being passed in its current form. In particular, Labor is concerned about the insertion of 'knowingly concerned' as a secondary form of criminal liability and the introduction of mandatory minimum sentences for firearm trafficking offences. We note the strong opposition held by peak law organisations with regard to these amendments in particular, and the lack of consultation that has occurred with respect to this bill.

Labor is concerned about the uncertainty surrounding the concept of 'knowingly concerned'. We note the concerns raised by the Law Council of Australia in relation to how the provisions have been drafted and the dangers that arise out of vaguely defined laws. We believe that the introduction of such a vague and open-ended concept as 'knowingly concerned' is inconsistent with the fundamental principle of the rule of law, a principle which requires that the Criminal Code be precise enough to allow people to readily ascertain prohibited conduct.

The government has argued that the need has arisen to introduce the concept of 'knowingly concerned' as a secondary form of liability into section 11.2 of the Criminal Code. The ability to effectively prosecute alleged offences against Commonwealth law remains the critical objective of the Commonwealth Director of Public Prosecutions, the CDPP. It is important that the CDPP have both the resources and the powers to achieve this important objective. However, Labor is not convinced that the provisions in schedule 5 of the bill support this objective. Labor notes the evidence provided by the Law Council of Australia, who strongly oppose the introduction of the concept of 'knowingly concerned':

The proposal to introduce knowingly concerned as part of the law of complicity in the Criminal Code – making it applicable to all Commonwealth offences, offences numbering in the hundreds – is a radical change which has been proposed without apparent consultation with States and Territory jurisdictions and against a background of its rejection on three prior occasions in the Model Criminal Code process.

Not only has the government failed to engage with key stakeholders with regard to these amendments it has also failed to justify the need for an additional form of secondary criminal liability to apply to all offences in the Criminal Code.

The government has highlighted particular categories of offences where the concept of 'knowingly concerned' is required, including drug and drug importation offences and insider trading offences. However, all of the offences identified have already been drafted in a way that addresses the concerns raised without the need to include 'knowingly concerned'.

Labor believes that the proposed change in relation to the introduction of 'knowingly concerned' would be a major change to the Model Criminal Code. Leading up to the adoption of the Model Criminal Code in 1995, there was a long consultation. The consultation occupied some years and included some of Australia's leading practitioners. There ought to be full consultation in relation to any proposed general change to the Model Criminal Code. No Australian state or territory, besides the ACT, has the offence of 'knowingly concerned'—nor does the United Kingdom.

Introduction of a general offence in the Commonwealth Criminal Code could lead to confusion in trials where the accused are charged with both Commonwealth and state offences. Uniformity is important for drug law offences where state and Commonwealth offences may well figure in the same trial. Labor do not oppose the introduction of the element 'knowingly concerned' in relation to individual offences in appropriate cases, and indeed this has already occurred in relation to a number of offences in Commonwealth legislation. As the Human Rights Commission noted in its submission to the Senate committee inquiry into the bill:

… it is difficult to anticipate the impact of extending this form of liability to all offences.

Labor cannot support schedule 5 of this bill in its current form. We urge the government to conduct a proper consultation process before proceeding any further with changes to the Model Criminal Code. We agree with the recommendation of the Law Council of Australia that, where there is a need to extend criminal complicity, the proposed amendments 'should be specific to that offence' only.

I turn to the question of mandatory minimum sentencing. Once again, alas, ideology has triumphed over rational public policy in this government. The government has continued to accuse Labor of not putting up a fight against organised crime because of our successful amendments to the Crimes Legislation Amendment (Psychoactive Substances and Other Measures) Bill 2014 which removed mandatory minimum sentencing for the trafficking of firearms into Australia. This is simply not the case.

In 2012, Labor introduced legislation that actually would have increased the maximum penalty for firearms trafficking to life imprisonment. That would have made it the same as the maximum penalty for drug trafficking. Minister Keenan's proposal contains a watered-down penalty of 15 years. The government has yet to explain why it is doing this. Minister Keenan's measures are also mostly symbolic, as they do not include specified nonparole periods. There is little evidence that mandatory sentences work as a deterrent. In fact, the government's own department says that mandatory sentences may create an incentive for a defendant to fight charges even where there is very little merit in doing so.

Labor wanted tougher penalties on gun trafficking, and the government has watered them down. Whilst Labor support the government's intention to protect the community from drug related violence, we urge the Abbott government to adopt a similar sentencing regime in relation to the proposed firearm-trafficking offences. This would send a strong message to serious criminals, but it avoids the issues the many fraught issues associated with mandatory minimum sentences.

This outburst from Tony Abbott is just another example of the Abbott government not listening to the experts or heeding the advice of those who understand the complexities and sensitivities of such cases. Labor maintain our position that the introduction of mandatory minimum sentences for those convicted of firearm-trafficking offences should be avoided. We note that these provisions have already been considered and rejected by the parliament and that the government has failed to justify the need for such provisions.

The Senate Legal and Constitutional Affairs Legislation Committee received evidence from a number of submitters who strongly oppose the introduction of these amendments. The Law Council of Australia referred to a number of unintended consequences of mandatory sentencing, which include 'undermining the community’s confidence in the judiciary and the criminal justice system as a whole'. The Australian Human Rights Commission noted that these amendments give rise to the potential for injustices to occur and run counter to the fundamental principle that the punishment should fit the crime. We also note the concerns previously raised by state prosecutors, who believe that these provisions can lead to unjust results and impose a significant burden on the justice system.

Labor believes that the government has failed to explain the need for mandatory sentencing provisions. I again draw attention to the Attorney-General's A guide toframing Commonwealth offences, infringement notices and enforcement powers, which specifically stipulates that minimum penalties should be avoided. I also refer to evidence previously given by the Attorney-General's Department, where it stated that it was 'not aware of specific instances where sentences for the trafficking of firearms or firearm parts have been insufficient'. While we note that the Attorney-General has the power to direct the CDPP to not prosecute an offender in certain circumstances, the government has given no indication that it would consider using this power when cases of injustice occur. Furthermore, the Attorney-General can also revoke an order at any point. We note that the current Attorney-General has already revoked an order introduced by the previous Attorney-General in relation to people-smuggling offences.

I urge the government to replace the imposition of mandatory minimum sentences for firearm-trafficking offences with increased penalty provisions, as set out in the Crimes Legislation Amendment (Organised Crime and Other Measures) Bill 2012. That bill was introduced in November 2012 by the then Labor government and proposed the introduction of new aggregated offences for firearms dealing which would attract a higher penalty of life imprisonment. These provisions would still send a strong message to serious criminals while minimising the risk of a miscarriage of justice.

I thank the House.

Luke Simpkins (Cowan, Liberal Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

I welcome the opportunity to speak today on the Crimes Legislation Amendment (Powers, Offences and Other Measures) Bill 2015. For a lot of us, when we are out in the streets doorknocking, one of the issues that come up is law and order. There are those moments when something has happened in the lives of the people that we meet. It might be hooning in the street or antisocial behaviour in the park, even littering. These are the issues that come up quite often. There is never a bad word spoken about the police or other law enforcement agencies. Often it is explained to me at the front doors of houses in Cowan that when the police do their job and they go to court that it is often the case that the penalty imposed upon those that have been caught offending does not meet community expectations. The member for Batman in his contribution mentioned that mandatory sentences undermine confidence in the judiciary. I think that sentences that do not meet community expectations are a much bigger problem with undermining the standing of the judiciary with the community.

I am quite sure that those that are on the receiving end of offences in this country as victims want to see that the punishment, the sentences, fit the crime. I think that a lot of people in this country welcome mandatory sentences. I endorse the fact that this bill will again introduce mandatory minimum sentences for offenders charged with trafficking of firearms under the Criminal Code. That is certainly something that people feel is necessary. They want to have confidence that again the punishment, the sentences, fit the crime. Firearms are obviously a deadly force and the trafficking of firearms increases the risk on our streets—there is no doubt about it.

I digress to a degree because this bill really is about ensuring that the law enforcement agencies have the tools and the powers necessary to do their job—to do what is necessary to keep Australians as safe as possible—and that those laws can stand up, that they are robust and that they are effective in dealing with the threats that crime poses to our citizens and residents of this country. With due respect, it is definitely very important that we have bills that do upgrades to better meet the threats that criminal offences pose. It is very important that we have these sorts of bills to look at the challenges and the threats of the modern age. I endorse that aspect with regards to penalties for firearms trafficking offences.

I would also like to talk briefly about the domestic production of methamphetamine and ice. This is receiving a lot of media attention lately. There are fairly constant reports about the threat that ice as a drug poses. There are towns in regional Australia that have been reported as being greatly affected by ice. I saw some disturbing figure—and I hope it is incorrect—that something like two per cent of the Australian population has had contact with ice. That is incredibly disturbing. Obviously no good can come of this and I am certainly one of those in favour of strong law enforcement at the same time as appropriate measures to deal with the scourge of addiction in this country. It is important that we have all the laws possible which are going to help control and deal with the importation of precursors—the materials necessary to make methamphetamine and ice.

One of my constituents, Richard Boudville, has sent me many articles on the problems with ice and I thank him for keeping me up-to-date with the latest in news reports on this matter. Not far from my electorate office about six or eight months ago one of my constituents found a person who apparently was a user of ice ransacking their house. After chasing this person out onto the street, the person hopped into a car and then tried to run my constituent over. That really does say something about the effects of ice, the lack of rationality and the need for us to act on this problem, not just with regards to our health and addiction treatments but also to send a very clear message to people that it remains an illegal activity and that people should keep away from it.

The next point I would like to raise is that aspect of the bill which deals with forced marriage. Somewhat different to forced marriages are arranged marriages. Cowan is quite a diverse electorate and I have lots of people that are of Indian origin or ethnically Indian from other countries around the world and a number of people have endorsed arranged marriages. It is something that I guess I am still getting used to—I find it a little bit odd but apparently sometimes they work out quite well and culturally that is the way things are done in some parts of the world—but I would like to draw a big difference between that and forced marriages. The high-profile case—and I am sure it is not the only one in this country—was in 2013 where a 12-year-old apparently, according to her father, agreed to marry a man who was 26 years old. To me that just looks like paedophilia and I am glad a number of charges were made in connection with that.

It is important that the amendments as part of this bill will make it clear that forced marriage offences apply where a person is incapable of understanding the nature and effect of a marriage ceremony because of their age or mental capacity. It is wrong on so many levels that someone as young as 12, or 13 or 14, should be forced into marriage—at those ages there should be no marriage at all. To me, in a perfect world, there should be no marriage before 18. Of course there are certain issues relating to that but certainly when we talk about 16 and under it is a terrible thing. Forced marriages are completely and utterly reprehensible.

Unfortunately, this case in 2013 is not isolated. I suspect there has been plenty of that. I do make an assertion there that I cannot prove, but I suspect it is not uncommon in certain parts of this country—and wherever it occurs it is most definitely wrong. I certainly support every effort to make it a more severe offence with increased penalties. Currently the maximum penalties are four years imprisonment or seven years imprisonment for an aggravated offence, but that should be upgraded and I certainly endorse the fact that the maximum penalties will become seven and nine years for these sorts of offences.

I do not want to go through every part of this bill word for word or repeat every line of the changes, but I do go to the issue of being 'knowingly concerned.' This bill talks about changes where being knowingly involved in supporting or enabling crimes should be imported back into the Criminal Code. When I was in the Federal Police back in the eighties, and even in the military police, again before 1995, it was certainly the case that 'knowingly concerned' was an offence that could be used to capture the involvement of people on the periphery of some offences but nevertheless who were undermining public safety through their knowledge. I have no problem at all with endorsing the return of being 'knowingly concerned' as an offence in the Commonwealth code. It is absolutely appropriate that we make sure that everyone, whether they are directly involved or just know of the events taking place, should be subject to possible prosecution. To do otherwise would basically have the effect of undermining our community safety.

The amendments contained in this bill are completely appropriate and I certainly support them. Although it is clear that the opposition is opposed to a number of these measures, I nevertheless look forward to them passing here and then in the Senate as well.

Jane Prentice (Ryan, Liberal Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

I rise to speak in support of the Crimes Amendment (Powers, Offences and Other Measures) Bill 2015. The bill is broad in scope. Its general intent is to improve and strengthen the ability of law enforcement and criminal justice agencies to investigate, prosecute and appropriately sentence offenders. Amendments to a total of 15 acts are proposed, most notably the Criminal Code Act 1995. Crucially, this bill amends the Criminal Code Act to introduce mandatory minimum sentences of five years imprisonment for firearm trafficking offences. Schedule 6 of the bill will give effect to mandatory five-year minimum sentences for two categories of offences. The first category is the existing offences of trafficking firearms and firearm parts within Australia. The second is the new offence of trafficking firearms into and out of Australia, which was included in the Crimes Legislation Amendment (Psychoactive Substances and Other Measures) Act 2015.

These amendments should come as no surprise to members. After all, they were detailed in the coalition's law and order pre-election commitments contained in the document The coalition's policy to tackle crime. We promised to send people to jail for a minimum of five years if they were caught bringing illegal firearms into Australia. With this bill, we are delivering on that commitment. This is yet another example of a government that is listening to the people of Australia; a government that made clear promises on law and order before the election and is determined to deliver on them despite Labor's daily attempts to obstruct and oppose. I am proud to be a part of a government that actually did the policy hard yards in opposition. We put a fully-formed plan to the people at the last election and were duly elected. The Australian people will not reward an opportunist opposition that fails to outline even the most basic details of what they plan to do if elected. This is something that Labor just has not learnt.

The main purpose of my contribution to the debate on this bill is to highlight and champion amendments that address the truly abhorrent practice of forced marriage. It is scarcely believable that in the 21st century in a free, fair and open society such as Australia there would be men who still believe that young girls and women are property—property that can be acquired without consent. That is what forced marriage is. It is akin to underage sex trafficking. It is akin to slavery. It is a practice that should have been left behind in the Dark Ages. Yet in recent years we have learnt through a few high-profile examples that forced marriage is still a reality for some young Australian girls. In quiet ceremonies in suburban backyards, or during sudden unexplained trips overseas, girls are being forced into marriage arrangements not of their choosing or to which they are too young to legally consent.

It is difficult to estimate just how prevalent the practice is. Due to the nature of the crime, it is believed that many cases go unreported because the victims are too afraid to speak out, and the cases that do come to the attention of authorities are often by chance. Take the example of a recent marriage between an 18-year-old man and a 15-year-old girl in the backyard of her father's home in Western Sydney. Tragically, the arrangement only came to the attention of authorities when the girl presented at her local public hospital believing she had suffered a miscarriage. The Child Abuse Squad was alerted, and the husband was arrested and charged. Another high-profile example involved a girl of 12 being forced into marriage with a 26-year-old foreign national in a clandestine ceremony in the Hunter Valley region of New South Wales. Media have reported that the man only came to the attention of authorities when he applied for guardianship of his so-called 'wife'.

Recent research by the National Children's and Youth Law Centre has estimated that there may have been as many as 250 child bride cases across Australia in recent years. The chief executive of the New South Wales Immigrant Women's Health Services, Dr Eman Sharobeem, estimates that there are at least 60 child brides living in south-west Sydney alone. The potential consequences for girls forced into marriage arrangements extend beyond the mere act of marriage itself. Plan International reports that forced marriages can often be accompanied by violence, abuse and forced sexual relations. It can also lead to early pregnancy, which brings with it an increased risk of birth complications. More broadly, forced marriage institutionalises subservience. This can mean a withdrawal from society, a withdrawal from education and a loss of control over personal finances. It can lead to depression, social isolation and anxiety.

That is why I am pleased that this bill provides a strong legislative response to the despicable practice of forced marriage. It does this in two ways: by both broadening the definition of forced marriage and increasing the maximum penalties available to the criminal justice system. This bill broadens the definition of forced marriage by making it clear that forced marriage offences apply where a person is incapable of understanding the nature and effect of a marriage ceremony, including by reason of their age or mental capacity. The effect of this will be to ensure that it will be more difficult to argue—as in the case of the 12-year-old girl in the example I identified earlier—that forced marriage laws do not apply to cases in which underage girls are alleged to have provided consent. The bill also strengthens the maximum penalties for forced marriage. Forced marriage offences currently carry a maximum penalty of four years' imprisonment for a base offence and seven years' imprisonment for an aggregated offence. This bill increases the penalties to seven years and nine years respectively. This ensures that penalties for forced marriage are brought in line with the most serious slavery related facilitation offence of deceptive recruiting.

Of course, a comprehensive response to forced marriage requires more than just tough laws. In this respect I commend the leadership of the Minister for Justice in investing $350,000 with Anti-Slavery Australia to expand the methods by which legal advice can be made to people facing forced marriage. Legal advice will now be able to be provided via email and text message so that it has the best chance of reaching the people who need it most. The coalition government has also launched the Forced Marriage Community Pack. The pack includes a range of materials about forced marriage for use by people in, or at risk of, a forced marriage, as well as for the general community, the media and other service providers. Ending forced marriage in Australia is a goal that transcends politics, and for this reason this bill should be supported. I commend the bill to the House.

Russell Matheson (Macarthur, Liberal Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

I rise today in support of the Crimes Legislation Amendment Bill 2015, which delivers on the government's commitment to tackle crime and make our community safer. This amendment bill provides law enforcement agencies with the tools and powers that they need to do their job by ensuring Commonwealth laws are robust and effective in targeting criminals and reducing the heavy cost of crime on our local communities.

The bill contains a range of measures across various Commonwealth acts, including measures to implement tough penalties for gun related crime, to increase the operation and effectiveness of serious drug and precursor offences, to ensure our criminal offence regimes are robust and effective, to ensure efficient arrangements for administering criminal law and related provisions and to increase penalties for forced marriage offences. I would like to commend the member for Ryan for the way she spoke about forced marriages—she spoke in depth and gave some great examples. It is a totally unacceptable practice and it is a despicable act which should not be tolerated in our society. I commend the member for Ryan for her speech.

Today I would like to focus primarily on the measures in this bill that tackle gun related crime and increase the operation and effectiveness of serious drug and precursor offences. Before becoming a politician, I served as a sergeant in the New South Wales Police Force for more than 25 years. Due in part to my background in the police force, I now sit on two parliamentary law enforcement committees. The first, the Australian Commission for Law Enforcement Integrity—or ACLEI as it is known—is responsible for preventing and investigating corruption issues in the Australian Crime Commission, the Australian Customs and Border Protection Service and the Australian Federal Police. The other committee I sit on, the Parliamentary Joint Committee on Law Enforcement, monitors and reviews the performance of the Australian Crime Commission and the Australian Federal Police. In March this year, the Parliamentary Joint Committee on Law Enforcement initiated an inquiry into crystal methamphetamine. This inquiry is currently looking into the criminal activities, practices and methods involved in the importation, manufacture, distribution and use of methamphetamine and its chemical precursors, including crystal methamphetamine or 'ice' and its impact on Australian society. In particular the committee is examining: the role of Commonwealth law enforcement agencies in responding to the importation, distribution and use of methamphetamine and its precursors; the adequacy of Commonwealth law enforcement resources for the detection, investigation and prosecution of criminal activities involving the importation, manufacture, distribution and use of methamphetamines and its precursors; the effectiveness of collaborative arrangements for Commonwealth law enforcement agencies with their regional and international counterparts to minimise the impact of methamphetamine on Australian society; the involvement of organised crime, including international organised crime and outlaw motorcycle gangs, in methamphetamine related criminal activities; the nature, prevalence and culture of methamphetamine use in Australia, including in Indigenous, regional and non-English-speaking communities; and strategies to reduce the high demand for methamphetamines in Australia.

A few weeks ago, the Parliamentary Joint Committee on Law Enforcement commenced the first of a series of hearings that will take place right across the country into crystal meth. The Parliamentary Joint Committee on Law Enforcement also plans to visit airports and ports in state capitals later on this year in relation to border security arrangements.

Methamphetamine belongs to the stimulant class of drugs that also includes amphetamines, ecstasy and cocaine which stimulates the brain and central nervous system. This class of drug can result in a range of psychological and physiological changes, such as increased alertness, euphoria and enhanced mood but also anxiety, panic, agitation, hallucinations, aggression and violence. There are three main forms of meth—powder, base and crystal or 'ice'. Ice is of particular concern to police and health professionals because it is the most potent form of methamphetamine. Frequent users of ice tend to be unemployed, psychologically distressed and engage in dangerous risk-taking activities.

In March, the Australian Crime Commission released a report that provides an unclassified intelligence picture of Australia's ice market. The report found that more than 60 per cent of Australia's highest risk organised crime targets are using ice as a source of profit to the detriment of the economic and social fabric of the Australian community. Chris Dawson, the CEO of the ACC, has stated that the use of ice continues to emerge as a national and international problem plaguing our communities and causing untold harm. How did we get to this point?

As one of the few developed nations in the world to avoid the full impact of the global financial crisis, Australia became, by default, a crime target for drug traffickers and transnational crime groups seeking a safe and stable economic environment in this region away from the financial turmoil affecting mainland Europe and the US in recent years. Australia's strong economic position and relatively affluent population with the ability to pay high prices for illicit drugs has meant that traffickers are able to sell their product at a higher wholesale price here than almost anywhere else in the world.

According to the United Nations Office on Drugs and Crime, the average street price for a gram of ice is US$80. In Australia it is US$500—six times the average price. Added to this, these criminal organisations are earning Australian dollars, allowing them to benefit from historically high exchange rates when transferring their criminal proceeds back into foreign currency. Consequently, crime in Australia has become so lucrative that competing criminal organisations are using increasingly aggressive tactics in order to capture the market, such as bribing, corrupting or coercing public officials who hold positions that enable them to facilitate criminal activities. The problem has become so significant that the ACC conservatively estimates that organised crime costs Australia $15 billion a year and is now 'part of the everyday lives of Australians in ways that are unprecedented'.

This new troubling era that Australia finds itself in has meant that law enforcement committees like the ones I sit on are becoming increasingly important in ensuring that our law enforcement agencies are safeguarded from the corruptive forces of the drug trade.

This bill tackles these corruptive forces head-on by making a range of amendments to the Law Enforcement Integrity Commissioner Act 2006 to improve the general operation of the act and empower the Integrity Commissioner to perform functions efficiently and effectively while also providing sufficient safeguards around the exercise of those functions. This will ensure that the Integrity Commissioner's powers under the act are clear and consistent, affording the commissioner greater discretion about how to deal with law enforcement corruption issues. These amendments support the government's election commitment to stamp out corruption within Australia's law and border enforcement agencies.

Unfortunately, when in office, those opposite cut the budgets of the ACC, AFP and the Australian Customs and Border Protection Service right at the time when Australia was becoming a ripe target for the drug trade. In 2009 Labor cut funding for Customs cargo screening by more than $58 million. That lead to a 75 per cent reduction in air cargo inspections and a 25 per cent reduction in sea cargo inspections.

Two years later, in 2011, Labor reduced mail inspections by 30 per cent, which meant that an extra 20 million packages entered Australia uninspected. It is no coincidence that the amount of drugs seized by Customs fell by 28 per cent and firearm detections dropped by 33 per cent. As the Hon. Michael Keenan said at the time:

When we talk of Labor's border protection crisis, it is more than their inability to control who comes to Australia. They cannot control what comes into Australia, and funding and personnel cuts to our front-line customs agencies are feeding directly into the ability of criminals to breach our borders.

Mr Keenan makes the point that, when dealing with street crime, you are almost always dealing with drug crime. So when you have a border protection agency that does not have the resources necessary to protect our borders then drugs will flow onto our streets and into our communities.

When the Howard government came into office in 1996 it increased funding to Customs in real terms by 238 per cent. Not only this but the day after the Port Arthur murders John Howard, who had been Prime Minister for only 57 days, introduced the most sweeping gun control reforms ever contemplated by any Australian government. According to author Simon Chapman, this agreement represents the single biggest advance in gun control in Australia's history—and possibly anywhere else in the world. I will never forget members of the public walking up to the counter at Surry Hills police station where I was working at the time and handing over their prohibited guns as part of the compensatory buyback scheme. In total, Australians surrendered more than 700,000 firearms—the world's largest weapons collection and destruction exercise to date.

Unfortunately, recent research has shown a steady increase in guns imported into the country over the past decade, with the number of privately owned guns now at the same level as it was in 1996. The fight against the flow of drugs and guns into this country began as soon as the Abbott Government came into office. As a matter of priority, the Abbott government reinvested $88 million into the Australian Customs and Border Protection Service to restore its ability to screen mail and air and sea cargo, it having been completely undermined by Labor.

Last year, the then Minister for Immigration and Border Protection the Hon. Scott Morrison announced the government's intention to merge the border control functions of the Department of Immigration and Border Protection and the Australian Customs and Border Protection Service into a single integrated border agency. Not only will this save the Australian taxpayer more than $480 million over four years; it will provide the optimal structure for the agency to protect our borders into the future.

The Abbott government have also provided Customs with: $98 million to establish a Strategic Border Command; $256 million for intelligence systems, including new capabilities to support the National Border Targeting Centre; $70 million to improve trade and travel, such as a new Trusted Trader framework; and $53 million for workforce measures and training, including the creation of the ABF College and enhanced integrity measures. We have also fast-tracked the $74 million National Anti-Gangs Squad, aimed at disrupting the operations of bikie gangs and other organised criminal outfits who are involved in and profit from the drug trade.

In the Abbott government's first year in office, law enforcement agencies recorded more than 93,000 illicit drug seizures, with a combined weight of 27 tonnes, and more than 110,000 arrests were made. These figures are the highest on record and are testament to the government's tough stance on crime as well as the vigilance and expertise of our law enforcement agencies. Seizures in 2013-14 include a record 10-tonne seizure of an ice precursor that, if not seized, could have been used to produce up to 4.5 tonnes of ice, which equates to an estimated 45 million individual street deals with an estimated value of $3.6 billion. More than 740 clandestine laboratories—or clan labs, as they are known informally—were detected during this reporting period, ranging in scale and capability from crude, makeshift operations to highly sophisticated labs using technically advanced equipment and complex chemical techniques. Regardless of their size or level of sophistication, the corrosive and hazardous chemicals used in clan labs are extremely volatile and pose significant risk to members of the public and the environment.

The new laws in this bill make two key changes to the Commonwealth drug and precursor offences so that it is easier to successfully prosecute individuals who are knowingly engaged in the importation and manufacture of ice. Firstly, this bill will make it easier to prosecute individuals who evade punishment because they manage their involvement in a drug operation in such a way that the prosecution cannot prove that they have the relevant level of knowledge of their own activities. Under this change when a person attempts to commit a serious drug or precursor offence the prosecution will only need to prove that the person knew that there was a risk and the substance involved was an illicit drug. This will make it simpler to prosecute individuals who are part of a larger drug enterprise but who deliberately ignore the obvious signs about how their actions fit into the broader scheme. Secondly, the laws in this bill will simplify the offences for importing chemicals used to manufacture illicit drugs. Under the amendments the prosecution will no longer have to prove that the importer intended to use these chemicals to produce illicit drugs or pass them on to a drug manufacturer for that purpose. It will be enough that the person imported a precursor without the appropriate authorisations.

This bill sends a strong message on the seriousness of gun related crime and violence by introducing mandatory minimum sentences of five years imprisonment for illegally importing firearms into Australia and illegally moving firearms or firearm parts across state borders. The coalition has been and always will be absolutely committed to stopping drugs and guns entering this country. As a former police officer I am honoured to be in this place to support this bill, which will dramatically improve the ability of our law enforcement agencies to fight this awful scourge on our community.

Louise Markus (Macquarie, Liberal Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

I rise to speak on the Crimes Legislation Amendment (Powers, Offences and Other Measures) Bill 2015. This government is committed to tackling crime and making our communities safer. As our Prime Minister often states, the first duty and responsibility of every government is to protect the nation and to advance its national interest. We have thorough and committed law enforcement agencies that work hard to keep our people and our communities in this nation safe. These agencies, however, require our Commonwealth laws to be robust and effective and provide them with the tools and powers they need to combat the cost of crime.

This bill contains a range of measures across various acts including tougher penalties for gun related crimes, increasing the operation and effectiveness of serious drug and precursor offences and increased penalties for marriage offences. Underage marriage is never okay. Children have many capabilities but they do not have the experience and ability to fight against forced marriage, particularly if this is being coerced by a family member or a community member they have been raised to respect.

As a result of the amendments in this bill, a child under the age of 16 will be presumed incapable of consenting to marriage, altering it from the current marriageable age under the Marriage Act of 18 years of age. Aggravated forced marriage relates to a victim less than 18 years of age. The amendments will also see anyone who engages in conduct that causes a person who does not understand the marriage ceremony to enter a marriage, such as arranging or officiating over the marriage of the child, also committing an offence. The penalty for engaging in conduct to cause another person to enter into an aggravated forced marriage will increase from a maximum of seven years imprisonment to a maximum of nine years. For non-aggravated forced marriage offences we will also increase the penalty from the existing four years imprisonment to seven years imprisonment.

Forced marriage is not okay and can be prevented with the right education and tools to empower young men and women, their families and friends to protect themselves. Girls of this age should be having fun, learning and gaining life experience, studying and enjoying safe and appropriate entertainment with friends and families. They should be working towards and looking forward to working towards a career and a free life in a country that prides itself on freedoms and equality. Sadly, however, this does not always exist and Australian girls themselves have been sent overseas by their families to be married and girls from other countries have been brought to Australia to be married. When we think of forced marriage we think of the young female but it affects many—the young women, the young men who feel pressured and do not want to be part of a forced arrangement, the parents and the friends who often feel powerless as onlookers.

Some of the tools that this government will provide to aid in the preventative measures are: $485,925 over four years for ongoing education; the launch of the forced marriage community pack, which provides information and resources on the issue; and maintaining specialised teams in the Australian Federal Police to investigate forced marriages. Also a range of forced marriage workshops took place during April-May this year. Education is vital in supporting these legislative amendments.

Last year, in 2014, it was alleged that a 26-year-old student entered a Sydney Centrelink office requesting assistance to become a guardian of a 12-year-old girl. This girl was in fact his wife. Of course, the police were called in and action was taken. The accused, who was here on a student visa, did not believe anything was wrong with seeking guardianship as the girl was his wife. This is why education in this space is vital.

There is news relating to the notorious Australian ISIS terrorists Khaled Sharrouf and Mohamed Elomar. They have been allegedly killed whilst fighting in Iraq. There are also claims that Elomar recently married Sharrouf's 14-year-old daughter. The government are introducing this amendment as we will not tolerate this type of behaviour. Many Australians support this view.

Amendments in this bill also relate to increasing the operation and effectiveness of serious drug and precursor offences. The community do not want to tolerate drug offences and the many hideous faces displayed with abuse, crime and violent behaviour, not to mention the impact that drugs have on those using them and their families.

On 20 May 2015, the Minister for Justice, the Honourable Michael Keenan, released in Sydney with the Australian Crime Commission Chief Executive Officer, Chris Dawson, the latest threat assessment, Organised Crime in Australia 2015, which reveals serious and organised crime in Australia still relies on the illicit drug market as its principle source of profit. More than 60 per cent of Australia's highest risk criminal targets are involved in the methamphetamine market and are driving the market's expansion. With this bill, the government will provide laws that will enable law enforcement agencies the powers to better combat drug crimes. This amendment will do this in two ways: firstly, it will ensure that it will be simpler to prosecute individuals who evade punishment because they manage their involvement in a drug operation in such a way that prosecution cannot prove that they have the relevant level of knowledge; and, secondly, it will simplify the offences for importing the chemicals used to manufacture illicit drugs. This will ensure the same burden of proof applies to cases involving an attempted drug offence as in a case where an accused actually committed an offence. With this amendment, the prosecution will only need to prove that the person knew there was a risk that the substance used was an illicit drug. This will make it simpler to prosecute those who operate in larger drug outfits but deliberately ignore obvious signs about how their actions fit into the broader scheme.

The second change deals with importing chemicals which organised criminal groups use in the production of illicit drugs like, in particular, methamphetamine and ice. With this change, prosecution no longer have to prove that the importer intended to produce illicit drugs or pass them on to a drug manufacturer for that purpose. It will now be enough that the person imported a precursor without appropriate authorisations. The use of these illegal drugs and in particular ice and the importers of the precursors and the producers of these illicit drugs must be accountable to the law. Manufacturers and drug dealers are becoming more conniving and knowledgeable about how to bypass the force of the law whilst the number of vulnerable victims grows.

In the electorate of Macquarie, a newspaper recently reported that five teenagers were hospitalised for using a drug known as Batman. These young teenagers have a future. They have parents, they have families and they are part of our local community. What was particularly frightening about this drug—an acid tripper and a form of ecstasy—was that little was known by emergency services about how it operated and how they needed to respond to assist the five young people.

The bill also provides tougher penalties for firearms-trafficking offences. We all want to feel safe in our daily lives and, fortunately, Australia does have significant licensing laws that contribute to our safety. Unfortunately, there has been too much sad news lately across the globe in news footage where we have observed shootings and their impacts on communities. This bill introduces mandatory minimum sentencing of five years imprisonment for the offences of possessing illegal firearms and firearm parts in Australia and illegally moving firearms and parts across borders in Australia. Again, our law enforcement agencies do an incredibly amazing job. If we can assist through Commonwealth legislation, then we will. As committed in our election promise, this government undertook to implement tougher penalties on gun related crime. I would like to take this opportunity to thank all our law enforcement personnel who work so tirelessly to keep our communities and our nation safe. If we can help to do your job better with Commonwealth laws that are robust and effective and enable you better tools and powers to combat crime, then this government will endeavour to take the action required to do so.

Jason Wood (La Trobe, Liberal Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

I also wish to speak on the Crimes Legislation Amendment (Powers, Offences and Other Measures) Bill 2015. As a former police officer with a background in counter-terrorism and organised crime, this bill is incredibly important to me, as well as to currently serving law enforcement officers. This bill seeks to address the gaps which we currently have in crimes legislation. There are always going to be gaps, but this will go towards filling some of those regarding firearms trafficking and border control.

Firstly, I should note that the coalition made an election commitment to tackle crime and here we are following through on that. The central parts of that commitment include the establishment of a local anti-gangs squad to tackle organised bikie gangs. I was very proud to be the author of that document when I was shadow parliamentary secretary for law enforcement. This came about by simply having discussions with the FBI in America and its counterparts at the local level. We found out that you need a joint approach—the same applies in the UK and Italy—where the states must work with the Federal Police to get the job done. It is the best way forward and we have proven that with our commitment.

We also need to reduce the number of illegal guns floating into the streets, with a $100-million boost to Customs screening. The bill introduces a five-year mandatory jail sentence for those caught bringing illegal firearms into Australia. I know the opposition is not keen to support this, but there are guns all over the streets in Melbourne at the moment, so the penalties in place currently are not working and a new approach is required. Advocating for nationally consistent penalties for serious firearm offences brings police and law-makers closer by encouraging roundtable discussions. Again, this is part of the anti-gangs squad platform: bringing all those working on this together. There is provision of $50 million for closed-circuit TV to deter criminal activity and it will pursue zero tolerance of corruption in Customs.

We are following through this commitment by, firstly, cracking down on trafficking. This means boosting border security with a $100-million boost to Customs to increase the rate of cargo consignment and package screenings at Australian borders, reducing the influence of criminals at ports and airports. Criminals definitely make their way to ports and airports. We need to tighten processing for the issuing of security clearances to people who work on wharves. That is so important. No longer do we want to see organised crime figures and people with serious criminal records working on wharves in Australia. We need to undertake a study about the use of automatic number plate recognition systems at all airports. (Time expired)

Pat Conroy (Charlton, Australian Labor Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Order! The debate is interrupted in accordance with standing order 43. The debate may be resumed at a later hour and the honourable member will have leave to continue his remarks when the debate is resumed.